3 ms·

Cigarette smoking: an underused tool in high-performance endurance training

16 points by jamesbritt 15y ago

billswift 15y ago
This was posted on LessWrong yesterday, http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/8j1/how_to_prove_anything_with_a_review_article/ http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/8j1/how_to_prove_anythi... , short, but interesting, discussion.
wazoox 15y ago
This is quite funny, unfortunately this shouldn't have been published on any other day than April 1st. In case of doubt see this quote: With this in mind, smoking should be commenced at as young an age as is reasonably possible. Children who have not yet developed a pincer grasp might require modified cigarette holders, safety lighters or both.
- frankus 15y ago
  The had me until that sentence. Actually increased hemoglobin levels in smokers wouldn't be surprising. The problem is that all of the increase (and then some, most likely) is bound to carbon monoxide and effectively inert.
betterth 15y ago
The headline definite drives controversy and thus views, but wouldn't a much better headline have brought up the very real fact that this has nothing to do with smoking for performance gains and everything to do with exposing 'reviews' as unreliable.
- betterth 15y ago
  Then again, using a misleading headline to direct traffic towards a journal article that is inherently misleading on purpose has a sort of meta-awesomeness to it. It's like inception, except with obfuscation.
tryitnow 15y ago
This is a good example of the problem with review articles and it's very well done. Totally straight-faced until the part about children smoking. However, I think the use of nicotine as a performance enhancer (not smoking though) is a pretty interesting subject. I've tried chewing nicotine gum and using a patch just to see if I noticed a difference (just a brief experiment I would never do it chronically). I did. Much better concentration, focus, energy etc. I'm curious to see how the "electric cigarette" phenomenon goes. That would be a way to deliver nicotine without the other risks of smoking. From what I understand nicotine is a carcinogen on its on, but I don't know how strong of one it is. It would also be fun to see if we could synthesize non-carcinogenic molecules based on the nicotine molecule with all the positive performance enhancing effects.

16 points by jamesbritt 15y ago

This was posted on LessWrong yesterday, http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/8j1/how_to_prove_anything_with_a_review_article/ http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/8j1/how_to_prove_anythi... , short, but interesting, discussion.

wazoox 15y ago

This is quite funny, unfortunately this shouldn't have been published on any other day than April 1st. In case of doubt see this quote: With this in mind, smoking should be commenced at as young an age as is reasonably possible. Children who have not yet developed a pincer grasp might require modified cigarette holders, safety lighters or both.

frankus 15y ago
The had me until that sentence. Actually increased hemoglobin levels in smokers wouldn't be surprising. The problem is that all of the increase (and then some, most likely) is bound to carbon monoxide and effectively inert.

betterth 15y ago

The headline definite drives controversy and thus views, but wouldn't a much better headline have brought up the very real fact that this has nothing to do with smoking for performance gains and everything to do with exposing 'reviews' as unreliable.

betterth 15y ago
Then again, using a misleading headline to direct traffic towards a journal article that is inherently misleading on purpose has a sort of meta-awesomeness to it. It's like inception, except with obfuscation.

tryitnow 15y ago

This is a good example of the problem with review articles and it's very well done. Totally straight-faced until the part about children smoking. However, I think the use of nicotine as a performance enhancer (not smoking though) is a pretty interesting subject. I've tried chewing nicotine gum and using a patch just to see if I noticed a difference (just a brief experiment I would never do it chronically). I did. Much better concentration, focus, energy etc. I'm curious to see how the "electric cigarette" phenomenon goes. That would be a way to deliver nicotine without the other risks of smoking. From what I understand nicotine is a carcinogen on its on, but I don't know how strong of one it is. It would also be fun to see if we could synthesize non-carcinogenic molecules based on the nicotine molecule with all the positive performance enhancing effects.